Question: could Eben Emael and the other Belgian forts hold out long enough to stop

Art

Monthly Donor
The Germans? the POD would be that there were machine-gun nests and infantry on the roof of Eben Emael and any other Belgian fort, and that the paratrooper drop was wiped out. What would change? Would France still fall?
 

Cook

Banned

Eban Emael was a tiny sideshow of no importance whatsoever; the ‘fortress’ was actually lower than the surrounding terrain, unable to bring fire to bare on anything more than the canal.

Blitzkrieg would have been over long before traffic on the canal became vital.

Yes, France falls.
 
The Germans? the POD would be that there were machine-gun nests and infantry on the roof of Eben Emael and any other Belgian fort, and that the paratrooper drop was wiped out. What would change? Would France still fall?

It makes no real difference to the French campaign but the loss of high quality paratroopers may have an effect on the Crete operation a year later.
 

Cook

Banned
It makes no real difference to the French campaign but the loss of high quality paratroopers may have an effect on the Crete operation a year later.

The Germans needed only 78 paratroopers to take the impregnable fortress Eban Emael, led by a lieutenant.


In the invasion of Crete they employed an entire airborne division, loosing the Eban Emael assault force would have been insignificant.
 
Perhaps a German failure at Eben Emael makes no difference but there is a counter argument. Eben Emael's guns commanded three bridges over the Meuse and Albert Canal. These bridges were also attacked by German paratroops. If two of the bridges had not been taken intact or if the guns of Eben Emael had prevented the German's from using the bridges for perhaps two days (the Belgians hoped to hold the Albert Canal for 5 days), Hoepner's 16th Panzer Corps (3rd and 4th Panzer Divisions) could not have advanced across the bridges towards the Gembloux Gap. OTL they were met and stopped by Prioux's Cavalry Corps of the French 1st Army (2nd DLM and 3rd DLM) in the Battle of Hannut on 12th -13th May. This was the largest tank battle of the Battle of France involving about 1,500 tanks. If it had not occurred, the French would have had two uncommitted armoured divisions under a fairly competent commander north of the main German attack across the Meuse on 13th May.

It is likely that Prioux's force would have been sent south to help Corap's 9th Army. We can argue that the French would not have reacted quickly enough but it is just possible that 9th Army would have held significantly longer and that the two Divisions Cuirassée de Réserve, 2nd and 3rd DCR, would not have disintegrated without much fighting. Guderian's Corps would still have broken through further south but might not have been allowed to advance alone. Just possibly the Anglo-French armies would have avoided being cut-off in Belgium, in which case even if France were later defeated it would be only after a significantly longer campaign.
 
Last edited:
Eban Emael was a tiny sideshow of no importance whatsoever; the ‘fortress’ was actually lower than the surrounding terrain, unable to bring fire to bare on anything more than the canal.

Blitzkrieg would have been over long before traffic on the canal became vital.

Yes, France falls.
Never been to Eben Emael have you, it's pretty much the highest point, especially when looking east.
Also, as mentioned, the guns of Eben could cover three vital bridges over the canal.
The Germans needed only 78 paratroopers to take the impregnable fortress Eban Emael, led by a lieutenant.


In the invasion of Crete they employed an entire airborne division, loosing the Eban Emael assault force would have been insignificant.
Eben WAS impregnable, to conventional attack, when build paras were barely exisent and the attack on Eben was pretty much the first commando-style airborne attack ever.
Also, the paratroopers neutralised the fort, it was only taken after getting reinforcements, who probably got there by crossing the aforementioned bridges. (Not that it matters form a strategic POV, neutralised is neutralised, surrendered or not.)
 

Art

Monthly Donor
the POD was that Eben Emael had M. G. nests on the roof,

And regular infantry to defend them. I know that "fortress troops" have always been considered inferior to regulars or shock units, but 78 men is just 2 platoons, and having found out that the German paratroops dropped without arms except knives, I think a regular company could massacre them. Or their transports are hit by A. A. fire and are either shot down or have to drop off target. You seem to be saying it would have MAJOR butterflies. Hurrah!
 
And regular infantry to defend them. I know that "fortress troops" have always been considered inferior to regulars or shock units, but 78 men is just 2 platoons, and having found out that the German paratroops dropped without arms except knives, I think a regular company could massacre them. Or their transports are hit by A. A. fire and are either shot down or have to drop off target. You seem to be saying it would have MAJOR butterflies. Hurrah!
Also, Regardless of Butterflies during The French Campaign ...

The NEXT Time Student's Force is Brought to Bear, if they Suffer Causalities in Belgium ...

They Will have Learned Enough about Para-Dropping, to Know The Importance of Forming up, Prior to Reaching their Objective!

:eek:
 
Just for your information: the German paratroops were landed by glider and thus were carrying their weapons from the very first moment. The whole op was extremely rehearsed and surprise absolute. Lose surprise and the op might fail, though.
 

Cook

Banned
Never been to Eben Emael have you, it's pretty much the highest point, especially when looking east.
Also, as mentioned, the guns of Eben could cover three vital bridges over the canal.

G’day Xavier,
Correct, I haven’t. All references to Eban Emael I’ve come across note however that in 1940 the terrain east of the canal was level with the top of the fortress.

Another point is that the bridges weren’t that vital, the plan top assault Eban-Emael dated back to when the German plan for the assault in the west placed the main emphasis in Army Group B in the North. When Manstein changed the plan so that the epicentre of the German attack was in the South through the Ardennes with Rundstedt’s Army Group A the attack on Eban-Emael became irrelevant but remained because Hitler had personally taken a keen interest in it.

It’s success or failure was not going to change the result of the assault in the west, that was decided further south.

Eben WAS impregnable, to conventional attack, when build paras were barely exisent and the attack on Eben was pretty much the first commando-style airborne attack ever.

This rather points out an important issue regarding the Belgian and, more importantly, French fortifications of the time; they were a greater obstacle to innovative thinking amongst the defenders than militarily to the Germans.

Of far more significance in terms of the use of paratroops is the assault on Rotterdam, it was a far larger operation and, combined with air attacks knocked the Netherlands out of the war.
 
Top